Leonard

Back slightly sooner than expected! But with the New Year soon to arrive on our door step I thought it more appropriate to bring this particular blog forward and mark both the Anniversary of Leonard Stringfield's death (18th December 1994) and the standards that he adhered to throughout his research and investgative career in the field of Ufology.

Leonard maintained the highest historical and forensic standards in his research, and shared much of his most critical work with other researchers whom he deemed trustworthy and professional in their approach to the UFO subject.


In addition Leonard also emphasized certain ethical priorities that we should always strive to achieve and maintain:


1) Never violate the promise made to a witness to protect his/her identity from public disclosure.



2) Stand for the highest quality of work and research. Do not become complacent with the media, or with people who substitute their own belief systems for genuine research.


3) Maintain meticulous, organized research notes that can be passed along to the next generation of researchers.

Leonard placed considerable faith in his sources, whilst maintaining their anonymity - with this in mind the Penkridge Incident was clearly deemed worthy enough to have been included within the pages of his Status Report Series. Stringfield, a former US intelligence Officer himself had clearly believed there was an element of truth in this story and that the small town of Penkridge, South Staffordshire did indeed play host a extrordinary event wayback in 1964.

IN REMEMBRANCE OF LEONARD H. STRINGFIELD

Extracts (Italics) taken from the thoughts of Forensic artist Bill McDonald who talked extensively with Leonard Stringfield in the last week of his life.










    

   

2009

The year's end is now fast approaching, with Christmas nearly upon us this Blog entry really is a case of just keeping the shop ticking over. This year as been one of great sadness for me personally. Although I started the year with great intentions, events have over taken me and subsequently its been a year of missed opportunities and while much of my research as been placed on the back burner I have to admit I've struggled at times to be motivated with my Blog. That said the year end will be one of contemplation.
Whilst I shall be kept busy over the Festive Season, hopefully the New Year will herald a return with a new and improved Blog with some long overdue investigative fieldwork following on from my research, with 2010 being a more productive year.

Best Wishes to all

Stephen
  

The Riddle of Penkridge

This particular Blog's more of a timely reminder as to why if at all pursue or indeed continue research into what most people would undoubtedly call the Incident that never was, because in essence there is little or nothing to suggest that anything out of the ordinary ever happened along the New Penkridge Road back in 1964 save the testimony of one individual whose recollection of events only emerged following an article that was published in the Burntwood Post back in 1996. Its not the intention of this Blog to question the veracity of this eye witness account but merely to place it alongside the undeniable absence of further testimony, which is so badly needed to propel this story from its otherwise virtual obscurity.

While Harold South's testimony lends, albeit unverified credence to Leonard Stringfield's account there is however the recorded account of two other independant eyewitnesses to an event that whilst not providing a direct link to Penkridge itself. Nevertheless paints a more disturbing picture that sits rather neatly between South's time frame of events and Stringfield's Unidentified Object...

The following notations are derived from the chapter UFO Down (Cosmic Crashes - Nick Redfern) and originates from the Public Records Office.

19th March 1964
Captain E D Morrison pilot of a London bound Boeing Clipper Jet en route from New York and Captain R A Botthos, a DC-8 pilot independent of Capt Morrison, two hundred miles from Lands End, at an altitude of 29.000 feet. Both pilots witnessed something entering the Earths atmosphere. Captain Botthos reported the object as travelling on a north to south trajectory - explode in a large flash with trailing columns of smoke.

It woke up the sky in a great white flash, observation quote: it was not a natural phenomena.
Captain Morrison
AIR 2/17526 Public Record Office file.

Coincidence?

 

 

Space Phantoms?

This is a area I've explored before although it stems from an article which was first published in 1975. Following the link below you'll see it was updated a few years ago by James Oberg.

http://www.astronautix.com/articles/phaspace.htm

Although conjecture on my part Leonard Stringfield's source stated that his primary task was the translation of intercepted Soviet military transmissions, during which he recalled one particular instance when decoding a message received at the ships ‘crypto-machine room'.The intercepted transmission related to a Unidentified object over-flying Europe.
Initially I took this to mean that the Soviets were tracking a "Unidentified" Object over Europe, now "What If" the object was actually known to the Soviets but the objects true origin was lost in translation leaving the Spyship to classify the object as Unidentified?

Whilst today much of the former USSR's Space program is now in the public domain we can see from the article that in the years leading up to Yuri Gagarin's successful manned space flight in 1961 the question of mystery surrounding possible missing or failed (manned) space flights appear to have been answered although could the same be said of unsuccessful unmanned space flights during the early 1960's?

In some respects the notion of a space vehicle going astray would lend credence to Stringfield's source and South's testimony regarding a partially covered Delta wing craft being loaded onto a flatbed truck. Its not beyond the realms of possibility that the vehicle in question could have been an early prototype unmanned Russian version akin to NASA's lifting body program.

Equally though the drawbacks to this speculative theory are themselves in abundance, officially the History of USSR's Space Program for the period in question tells us that with the success of Sputnik 1 in 1957, the USSR had a considerable number of ambitious projects under development with the goal of sending space probes to the Moon Mars and Venus. Certainly by the end of the 1950’s other Design engineers had entered the program with an additional further array of ambitions - including Manned Spaceflight to both the Moon and Mars, Orbiting Battle Stations and Combat Spacecraft.

By the beginning of 1960 there were no fewer than thirty Space Systems on the drawing board, admittedly few of these designs ever reached the hardware stage largely because of internal wrangling that existed within both the political and military mindset of the Soviet Union. Nevertheless the Military overall asserted control, with the research programs of 1962 to 1964 code-named Shchit (space systems), Osnova (space equipment), and Ediniy KIK (ground systems) thus defining what would become the first generation of Soviet operational space systems. Although many of these systems would not be realised until 1966.

Arguably one of the most contentious projects during this period was the considered need for a Space Plane and while work continued on winged spacecraft for launch by ballistic missiles. The first such program, the VKA of 1958-1960, resulted in developing designs launched by means of the Korolev R-7 rockets. In 1960. this work was cancelled, and development commenced on Kosmoplan and Raketoplan space planes. Whilst ultimately these projects would also be cancelled there nevertheless - was a considerable amount of research and development afforded the concept - while officially no manned version of the VKA was ever manufactured.

Would it be considered to outrageous to ponder the question… was there an ill-fated unmanned prototype version of this winged spacecraft carried aloft on a Korolev R-7 Rocket that possibly malfunctioned whilst in orbit back in 1964?

The Crash Site

Having been not so much strangely but emotionally absent from my blog for sometime, this article is somewhat of an introduction; namely for myself and to mark a return to writing by removing that mythical block writers so often mention when faced with a sudden loss for words.

During this period I quite selfishly took time away from everything including my partner and visited the area surrounding the New Penkridge Road. In essence the scene of Harold South's alleged encounter with a Military Road Block wayback in 1964.

What follows are my observations and thoughts of that day.... having arrived in Cannock early that morning and with the sun shining I made my way along the New Penkridge Road quickly passing the residential properties to reach Sandy Lane (the scene of the only known Road Closure which occurred on the 10th May 1964) along with its Public House "The Shoal Hill Tavern" Here I left the road and walked through the wooded area on the opposite side of the road passing the War Memorial. Afterwards emerging further along on to open land which ran parallel to the New Penkridge Road. Ultimately this brought me onto Cocksparrow Lane, pausing on an isolated heavy wooden bench within this area my thoughts were two fold "Was this the field South Crossed with his Camera?" and had he at this point "In effect by passed the Road Block?" Although its unclear as to the exact location of the Crash Site, for the purpose of this and future blogs or until a time further information becomes available the Crash Site, which based on Harold South's testimony resides somewhere in the region between Cocksparrow Lane and Mansty Lane on the right hand side of the New Penkridge Road.

Having emerged onto Cocksparrow Lane at the Junction with the New Penkridge Road I crossed the road to the other side and briefly watched the traffic which was occasional and light, this was around mid-morning on a weekday (Tuesday) as it would have been forty five years ago although I would surmise traffic in 1964 would've been considerably modest by today's standards.

Here I made a number of observations. Looking at the road as it stands today along with the hedge row and tree's the field only really becomes visible when virtually on top of the Junction with Cocksparrow Lane in addition the grass verges either side of the road are raised and would offer a limited view being seated low down in a car or van, although having said that the hedge row and undergrowth over the perimeter fencing may not have existed back in 1964 and the view may have been unrestricted but nevertheless Harold South would have almost certainly had to have reached this point to view the field when he encountered the Road Block.

Furthermore having travelled around the perimeter of the open farm land there were indeed several access points that would've allowed unhindered access into the field presenting little problem to maneuver a transporter or crane in a retrieval operation.

Travelling down Cocksparrow lane towards Shoal Hill I noticed a Nature Reserve on the right hand side more or less directly opposite an entrance to the open farm land but did not follow this through and continued on towards Shoal Hill and Huntington, Having reached the base of the hill I took a short break before ascending up to the top, which did indeed afford me a greater view of the surrounding area.

It was immediately clear that looking towards Huntington many of the new developments would not have existed back in 1964 and the area itself looking towards the New Penkridge Road had remained largely undeveloped. Nevertheless if something of a unusual nature did occur here back in 1964 its descent should really have not gone unnoticed and if we acknowledge there maybe additional witnesses to the Retrieval Operation, someone, somewhere must have bore silent witness to its arrival....

RAF Melksham

Essentially this is a hypothetical blog in-so-far as Harold South's recollection of events are concerned, with regards to his confiscated camera, which was allegedly returned to him in a parcel, post marked "Melksham, Wiltshire" three weeks after his encounter along the New Penkridge Road back in 1964.

As South points out there are a few RAF Bases within this area in addition to RAF Melksham, the most immediate and noticeable (as far as Ufology is concerned) being RAF Rudloe Manor, along side RAF Lyneham there is also another complex of particular interest, Hawthorn is the location of a number of defence related underground facilities in the vicinity of Corsham, established during the Second World War and later used as the Central Government War Headquarters throughout the Cold War. A further part of this complex was developed as an aircraft engine factory, to act as a fallback should the then Bristol Engine Factory at Filton be destroyed by bombing. The engine factory was never used officially.

Naturally I first looked at RAF Melksham with the view, why would the confiscated film have been sent here? A first look at the History of RAF Melksham revealed it to primarily be the Number 12 School of Technical Training (24 Jun 1940 – 26 Feb 1965) resuming the major role after the Second World War of training Aircraft Fitters in the field of Electrical and Instrumentation, although there were a number of other specialised training courses covering engine trades and motor transport these were also held at Melksham and were conducted over shorter time periods.

In addition Melksham was a exceptionally large base, which at its height accommodated over ten thousand personnel, housing No 10 School of Recruit Training, which averaged 100 a week of mainly National servicemen until its final intake arrived in June 1953.

There are however two points of interest with regards RAF Melksham, the first being although it was never an operational flying base because it had no runway. The aircraft (which were on display during open days) were used for training purposes for ground crew and technicians and were transported to and from the base in dismantled form.

Secondly there appears to be some confusion over the actual date of closure, most official sources place the year as 1965. Yet the official commemorative stone (see photo above) and the unofficial website with the Squadron emblem place the closure date as 1964.

Which if true could well mean the base was virtually closed at the time of the Penkridge Incident (assuming the date and month are correct; 26 February) this at first glance might appear to rule out RAF Melksham as playing any role in the events at Penkridge.

For a moment though lets consider the possibility that RAF Melksham didn't play any active role in handling the confiscated Film or Camera and these items were more than likely processed and analysed at RAF Rudloe's Photographic Laboratories along with the camera to see if there was any specialised equipment being used by South, purely as a security measure, conjecture of course.

But what if, RAF Melksham instead played host to a downed object retrieved from a field alongside the Penkridge New Road? Clearly if Melksham was in the process of closure with no further intake of RAF personnel, is it feasible that a small contingent of Senior Officer's, NCO's, Qualified instructors; specialist's in Engine's, Airframe's, electrics and instrumentation be assembled and dispatched to oversee the retrieval and transportation of an unidentified object?

Furthermore the transportation of aircraft was a common enough occurrence and would not have attracted undue attention, providing the ideal opportunity to house securely the object in one of RAF Melksham's vacated hangers, whilst pending transportation to its final destination, possibly via RAF Lyneham and out of the country as part of a co-ordinated NATO exercise.

Its a hypothetical scenario, but not beyond the realms of possibility.

The Police Interview and the Telephone call

Following on from my previous thoughts on Harold South's testimony and his recollection of events at Bloxwich Police Station, (Pictured above, 2009) something else recently occurred to me. Although there is a reference in "Cosmic Crashes" that Harold South's original letter mentions he was warned to stay silent by the civilian Police (p77) Its unclear as to whether during or throughout the interview he was asked to sign the Official Secrets Act or if the Police sought his co-operation in remaining quite and requested he did not discuss with anyone his encounter along the New Penkridge road or the subsequent confiscation of his camera and film.

Yet, during his interview in 1996 with Nick Redfern and Irene Bott. Harold South makes a remarkable if somewhat unusual statement, prior to the interview he alluded to a mysterious telephone call from the Ministry of Defence Police. Although I must confess here this is one area I originally intended to stay away from largely because it is virtually impossible that this could ever be verified beyond the established fact that there had been a call placed to Harold South's home number from a Midlands based operator service utilised by the Military.

Although It could well have been the case that along with Nick and Irene, SUFOG's activities in the local papers of the time had given cause for concern somewhere within the establishment that the subject might come under the spotlight again, especially at a time when the UFO phenomenon was enjoying unprecedented media attention worldwide and a serious concerted effort on behalf of local UFO researchers might indeed unearth a few skeletons.

All though South's letter to Irene Bott was received a week after the article was published in the Burntwood Post referencing the Penkridge Incident, its highly unlikely that the intelligence community would have been aware that Harold South was about to come forward (bearing in mind thirty years had elapsed and as far as we know he had not shared his experience with anybody else) and re-iterate his story, unless there was a surveillance operation already in place on SUFOG members, which is not beyond the realms of possibility. But a more likely scenario would be that if Harold South had indeed witnessed something of importance to National Security back in 1964, he would have remained on file somewhere, with a risk assessment being made, which would have been downgraded as the years passed.

Again any surveillance I would have thought been strictly routine and low key, since it wouldn't have been to difficult to keep tabs on Harold South (or anybody for that matter) as he moved around over the years through his National Insurance number, State Pension and Driving Licence etc. So at what stage did the alarm bells start ringing within the MOD if they thought he was about to be unearthed?

Because there appears to have been a considerable lapse in time from the initial contact made with Irene Bott and the subsequent interview in December of 1996, likewise there seems to be no rhyme or reason for the mysterious call because the call serves no purpose when you consider that South was a retired civilian in his late sixties, he was hardly a threat to National security even if he had elected to tell his story at this late stage, thirty years had elapsed, given that no one else (that we know of) as come forward to corroborate his testimony. Why interfere and risk greater exposure by placing a telephone call which if anything would only lend greater credence to his story? Here again the timing is impeccable, why wait until the day of the interview?

In his interview South tells us he was flustered by the call, but there is no mention as to whether he was warned off from speaking to both Nick and Irene. Instead there is a reference to a complaint the nature of which is unknown in addition to being given a number to call, which turned out to be the Guard Room at Whittington Barracks, Lichfield.

Here the horns are really going to grow out of my head!!! But just before they do, I thinks its only fair to point out that never actually having met Harold South the following comments are purely conjecture and therefore should not necessarily be seen as a true reflection of his integrity or character, but seen through the eyes of natural scepticism only.

Harold South did indeed have a telephone call from a Midlands Based operator service controlled by the Military on that morning in December 1996 prior to the arrival of his two guests, but did he instigate it himself? Lets face it, its not to difficult to make a telephone enquiry, then ask them to return the call. was his enquiry for Whittington Barracks telephone number by any chance? On the face of it we know very little of Harold South's background, presumably he did his two years National Service? Did he complete his training with the Staffordshire Regiment based at Whittington Barracks? Is this why he chose Whittington Barracks? Why didn't he return the call when he was asked to do so, more importantly if he was concerned why did allow Irene Bott to return the call on his behalf if he thought he was being subtly advised not to speak about his experience?
Furthermore what was the complaint about? Was this another subtle attempt on behalf of Harold South to reinforce the link between the alleged call made by MOD Police and the pre-text for which he was allegedly told to report to Bloxwich Police Station in 1964; namely that a complaint had been made about him "cutting up a motorcyclist" ???

Finally If the Police had traced Harold South through the registration number of the van he was driving that day, surely this would have been registered to his place of work, being a company vehicle, they would have also had to obtain his name address and telephone number from his employer Bendix where he worked. Then after which they quite astonishingly call his home leaving a message with his mother to ask him to report to Bloxwich Police Station?

Right that's enough healthy scepticism for this blog!!! Regardless of whether or not we choose to accept Harold South's story further research will continue and hopefully redress the balance of his testimony in future blogs in a more positive and favourable light.